Back
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11407
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
AZAD P H – Appellant
Versus
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER THE CONVENOR OF THE LOCAL LEVEL – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 38227/2015
Land regularization under Section 3A of KLUO is permissible for lands converted from agricultural use prior to the amendment.
Headnote:
Land - Ownership - Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967; Act 28 of 2008, Section 3A; Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961, Section 6A - The court interpreted the provisions regarding land utilization, confirming the petitioners' eligibility for regularization under Section 3A in light of the agricultural report and past land usage.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners claimed ownership of specified lands, stating they sought to utilize the parcels for other purposes. They were previously denied regularization under Section 3A of the KLUO due to its classification but provided evidence of the land being unfit for cultivation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the petitioners eligible for regularization under Section 3A as the land was not paddy land and had been converted 20 years prior. The report from the Agricultural Officer supported this conclusion, leading to directions for processing their application.
Issues: Whether the petitioners could regularize the use of their land under the amended provisions of the KLUO given its agricultural status and past usage.
Ratio Decidendi: The amendment of the Act 28 of 2008, specifically Section 3A, allows for regularization of land that has been converted from agricultural use over a decade ago, as it does not classify the disputed lands as paddy.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition in favor of the petitioners, allowing them to apply for regularization.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners claim to be the owners and in possession of certain extent of land as shown below:
| 1st Petitioner Owner of 1.7652 | hectares | In Re-survey Nos.54, 105, 106, 53 and 48 | In Block No.18 of Muttambalam Village in Kottayam Taluk, Kottayam District | By virtue of sale deeds of SRO Kottayam - SRO Nos.2680/06, 2684/06, 2683/06, 1981/07 and 2686/06 |
| 2nd Petitioner | Owner of 1 hectare and 2.76 Ares | In Resurvey Nos.86, 87 | In Block No.18 of Muttambalam Village in Kottayam Taluk, Kottayam District | By virtue of sale deeds of SRO Kottayam - SRO Nos.2589/06, 2584/06 |
| 3rd Petitioner | Owner of 75.10 Ares | In Resurvey Nos.51, 50/1 | In Block No.18 of Muttambalam Village in Kottayam Taluk, Kottayam District | By virtue of sale deeds of SRO Kottayam - SRO Nos.1929/06, 567/07 |
2. The above properties are lying as contiguous and compact area. The petitioners have approached the Revenue Divisional Officer under clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 to utilise the land for other purposes.
3. This Court, by order dated 21/12/2015, directed the Agricultural Officer to file a report as to the nature of the land. The learned Government Pleader made available before this Court for perusal, a copy of the report of the Agricultural Officer. The report would indicate that the land is fully unfit for cultivation and the land is a dry land and has been converted prior to the enactment of the Act 28 of 2008 and approximately about 20 years ago.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioners' request cannot be considered under clause 6 of the KLUO based on the amendment to the Act 28 of 2008 inserting Section 3A . The petitioners are entitled for regularisation of the land in terms of Section 3A . The petitioners also have filed an I.A.No.797/2016 seeking similar relief. Accordingly, the following directions are issued:
i. If the petitioners apply to the Collector in form No.4 as appended in the Rules along with the fees, the same shall be considered within one month from the date of receipt of the application along with a copy of this judgment.
ii. In view of the fact that the land is not included in the Draft Data Bank and the land cannot be treated as a paddy land, further report from the Village Officer is not necessary.
ii. The District Collector shall therefore, grant necessary permission on remitting 25% of the notified fair value per Are.
iii. Once regularisation order is issued, necessarily, the petitioners are entitled to use the land as purayidam and dry land in accordance with law.
iv. The petitioners are also free to approach the Tahsildar for reassessment of land after regularisation order is issued in terms of Section 6A of Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 .
v. If such applications are filed, the Tahsildar shall consider the applications in the light of the directions of this Court in the judgment in Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma [2015 (2) KLT 516] within one month from the date of receipt of the applications.
In the light of the above directions, the delay involved in approaching the District Collector shall be condoned.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
